Good imitation of a victim, though. I guess we’re all going to get fluent in “victim” if the Obamanite wins. (gag)

I’m sorry, but I’m afraid you’ve gotten your facts wrong.  Everyone knows that the Native Americans were basically a peaceful peoples group, living in harmony with nature.  They didn’t pollute or wipe out the species that their very existence depended upon.  They had a natural tolerance for everyone and everything, only becoming violent when the white man came to visit death and destruction upon their way of life via disease, guns and material wealth.  They didn’t need the white man’s steel knives, his hatchets, guns or blankets - they were doing just fine with stone implements and animals skins.  They didn’t need the white mans horses, they walked everywhere and so were very VERY healthy.  They had a great tolerance to the weather, and could tell when a blizzard was coming so they could put on an extra layer of animal skins and climb in their shelters.

I think if the noble American savage had only been dealt with in a kinder and more gentle manner we could have integrated ourselves more completely into a workable society that we both could have found satisfaction in.  As it is though, the Native American population was devastated.  Now their members are forced to live in houses that have modern appliances, buy food at the local grocery store, wear heavily manufactured clothing,  use modern medications and engage in modern education.  The White race should be ashamed of itself, and give the Native North American population massive amounts of social benefits so that they can regain some level dignity and respect for both themselves and their culture!  Shame! Shame! Shame! </sarc>

Indeed, Americans, real ones, usually derive a love of country through experience - that which is accrued over many years - of living in and comprehending the fragility and sacredness of her greatest gift; freedom. The exercise of free will, the ability to fall or rise according to one’s own ambitions.

They come to revere the freedom that folks like you threaten to extinguish with your suffocating insidious platitudes about “greater good” - a greater good that somehow can not be achieved by the recipients of such “good” without the  coerced largess of those who actually create wealth.

In simple terms, little Billy, Obama and his acolytes, you and your “Meredith”, represent a parasitic breed that bleeds their host through bullying and extortion. What exactly are you folks going to do after you finally bleed the host dry? Guess you’ll have to get a real job then - if there are any left.

Senator Joe Biden, chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee…is trying to rush Obama’s “Global Poverty Act” (S.2433) through his committee. The legislation would commit the U.S. to spending 0.7 percent of gross national product on foreign aid, which amounts to a phenomenal 13-year total of $845 billion over and above what the U.S. already spends.

The bill… passed the House by a voice vote last year because most members didn’t realize what was in it. Congressional sponsors have been careful not to calculate the amount of foreign aid spending that it would require. According to the website of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, no hearings have been held on the Obama bill in that body.
[...]
The House version (H.R. 1302), sponsored by Rep. Adam Smith (D-Wash.), had only 84 co-sponsors before it was suddenly brought up on the House floor last September 25 and was passed by voice vote. House Republicans were caught off-guard, unaware that the pro-U.N. measure committed the U.S. to spending hundreds of billions of dollars.

Why all the subterfuge if it were legislation that would be well received by America at large, as opposed to just American leftists.

The legislation itself requires the President “to develop and implement a comprehensive strategy to further the United States foreign policy objective of promoting the reduction of global poverty, the elimination of extreme global poverty, and the achievement of the Millennium Development Goal of reducing by one-half the proportion of people worldwide, between 1990 and 2015, who live on less than $1 per day.”

The bill defines the term “Millennium Development Goals” as the goals set out in the United Nations Millennium Declaration, General Assembly Resolution 55/2 (2000).

It is inextricably linked with The Millennium Project in every report cited. From the Millennium Project web site:

What is the 0.7 commitment, and where did it come from?

The commitment to provide 0.7% of gross national product (GNP) as official development assistance was first made 35 years ago in a General Assembly resolution, but it has been reaffirmed repeatedly over the years, including at the 2002 global Financing for Development conference in Monterey, Mexico. However, in 2004, total aid from the industrialized countries totaled just $78.6 billion —or about 0.25% of their collective GNP.

Is Jeffrey Sachs lying too Margaret?

Jeffrey Sachs, who runs the U.N.’s “Millennium Project,” says that the U.N. plan to force the U.S. to pay 0.7 percent of GNP in increased foreign aid spending would add $65 billion a year to what the U.S. already spends. Over a 13-year period, from 2002, when the U.N.’s Financing for Development conference was held, to the target year of 2015, when the U.S. is expected to meet the “Millennium Development Goals,” this amounts to $845 billion. And the only way to raise that kind of money, Sachs has written, is through a global tax, preferably on carbon-emitting fossil fuels.

In addition to seeking to eradicate poverty, that declaration commits nations to banning “small arms and light weapons” and ratifying a series of treaties, including the International Criminal Court Treaty, the Kyoto Protocol (global warming treaty), the Convention on Biological Diversity, the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women, and the Convention on the Rights of the Child.

The Millennium Declaration also affirms the U.N. as “the indispensable common house of the entire human family, through which we will seek to realize our universal aspirations for peace, cooperation and development.”
(source)

I am an American. I do not live, nor do I want to live “in the common house of the entire human family”. I want to live in the sovereign USA and I want my taxes spent in this country, on our people, on our infrastructure, weaponry and industry. America and her private citizens have given, of their own free will, far more than this ungrateful world deserves. But I suppose you haven’t noticed that throwing money at poverty simply doesn’t work - unless of course you are employed by the many NGOs and “Christian” groups who profit from this crap. Would that be you Meredith? Must suck to spend your time Googling for references to this monstrosity and cut and paste your useless propaganda. I won’t wish you any luck in your parasitic mission.

Oh, I added the link to your blog to your comment. Why try to hide your “activist” status honey. No one here would mistake you for anything else.

Currently, U.S. global development policies and programs are scattered across 12 departments, 25 different agencies, and almost 60 government offices. Increased coordination is sorely needed to be effective.

The Global Poverty Act (not TAX), S.2433, is an authorizing piece of legislation which sets a directive for those departments under the Secretary of State to create a plan to address the first United Nations Millennium Development Goal.

This bill is NOT an appropriating piece of legislation that would direct any new funds (or global taxes) to United States foreign assistance. The Congressional Budget Office estimates that this legislation would cost less than $1 million to implement.

S.2433 does not prejudge what the strategy should be, only that a strategy should be created to more effectively distribute the foreign aid the United States already provides the developing (and developed) world. The Global Poverty act does not subjugate the United States to the will of the United Nations. The strategy would apply only to those programs administered by the United States and the strategy would have complete Congressional oversight.

For more information on the myths related to this bill, please visit: http://www.bread.org/take-action/ol2008/gpa-fact-sheet.pdf.

For more information, you can easily read this bill at: http://www.thomas.gov/cgi-bin/query/C?c110:./temp/~c110vneZOT